If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Crappy SATA performance on asus p5q

10-11-2008, 10:30 AM

Hello Guys

Finally upgraded my p3 700 to a quad core 2.66 4gig ram 750G HDD with asus p5q MB Everything seems to work but the performance from the sata HDD is pretty crap. In fact I get the same performance from a ata 133 ide disk connected to a udma66 HDcontroler

Uhm, you do know that "Timing cached reads" means that it is basically testing your ram, don't you? The only relevant part regarding your harddrive is "Timing buffered disk reads". And there you do get a difference between sata and ide. Beside this: those values look completely normal to me. Do *NOT* expect to really get 300MB/s just because marketing says that SATA2 is specified with a speed of up to 300MB/s.

With modern harddrives it is possible to get ~100MB/s read speed. But this always depends on the drive series/manufacturer. Current "mid range" is somewhere around 90MB/s, so your values for the SATA drive looks really fine and okay to me.

As you can see, just because a drive is SATA does not make it by far faster (cf the SATA1 drive and the PATA drive). And as you can see, too, the 1TB Samsung drive gets up to 107MB/s, basically the maximum what most current hdds are able to achieve. You should not be disappointed about the ~87MB/s you get.

Comment

Yes but that is still 20 MB/Sec faster than my Samsung Spinpoint 750 Gig SATA2?

Yes, it is, *BUT* your 750GB version is built on a different basis. That is it does have three smaller pattern while mine has three high patter with a higher density. This makes a difference in this case. If you had a benchmark of the 640GB version, you would see it is as about as fast as my 1TB drive since it has 2 of the patter with higher density.

Comment

Yup, when it comes to harddrives, the interface type is not presently a bottleneck for any conventional harddrive. As ivanovic pointed out, other items such as areal density, cache, and read write methods are more of a factor for disk performance then the interface it uses. Even the Velociraptor drives cannot saturate a Sata 1 interface with it's sustained throughput.

Comment

Yes, it is, *BUT* your 750GB version is built on a different basis. That is it does have three smaller pattern while mine has three high patter with a higher density. This makes a difference in this case. If you had a benchmark of the 640GB version, you would see it is as about as fast as my 1TB drive since it has 2 of the patter with higher density.

Are you sure about this? This is my model SAMSUNG HD753LJ. If this is the case i am pretty pissed about this and will change it immediately.

Comment

Are you sure about this? This is my model SAMSUNG HD753LJ. If this is the case i am pretty pissed about this and will change it immediately.

Yes, 100% sure. The 750GB model is based on 3 250GB pattern where the 640GB is based on 2 320GB pattern. The size per patter might be a little higher and not deactivated to serve as "backup space" for those areas that tend to get damaged over time, so in fact the patterns might be 340GB or something like this.

What stays is that the 320, 640 and 1000GB drives are built upon the same patters. So they are more dense and the header has to move less while reading (and moving the read head takes a huge potion of time needed for reading/writing).

Comment

Yes, 100% sure. The 750GB model is based on 3 250GB pattern where the 640GB is based on 2 320GB pattern. The size per patter might be a little higher and not deactivated to serve as "backup space" for those areas that tend to get damaged over time, so in fact the patterns might be 340GB or something like this.

What stays is that the 320, 640 and 1000GB drives are built upon the same patters. So they are more dense and the header has to move less while reading (and moving the read head takes a huge potion of time needed for reading/writing).

Thanks for the info, much appreciated. It looks like I have made the wrong choice.